This is not a fallacy. This is a rhetorical strategy, and a very successful and common one. It has nothing to do with logic, only presentation.
– John LawlerOct 1 '14 at 15:58

How about replacing 'flaw' here with 'potential sticking point'? Surely nobody points out what's wrong with his argument. He should rethink it. He's pointing out where differences of opinion about policy are likely to occur.
– Edwin AshworthOct 1 '14 at 16:28

4

It is not a fallacy. It is a strategy. A preemptive strategy. A preemptive reflexive strategy - to first point out the perceived weakness and in reflex use its mitigation as a magnet to coagulate the effectiveness of your strategy.
– Blessed GeekOct 1 '14 at 16:37

2

What kind of fallacy did the asker make here by assuming it's a fallacy, when it's only a strategy whose argument might contain a fallacy?
– Tim S.Oct 1 '14 at 20:34

2 Answers
2

That's not a logical fallacy. It's a very common rhetorical tactic called procatalepsis, or more colloquially in American English, prebuttal.

The strategy consists of anticipating your opponent's argument, and then responding to it, as if they had raised the objection themselves. That way, they can't later raise that objection, because you've already done it for them and explained why that line of thinking would be wrong.

Of course, the way in which you respond to the argument may contain a logical fallacy, but that's a separate issue from the fact that the rhetorical strategy is being used at all.

But if there is a flaw in your argument, you can't explain why your opponent's [expected] argument will be wrong. Procatalepsis seems to refer to a successful pre-emptive counter to an expected counter-argument, not a prior admission of the inadequacy of one's own.
– Edwin AshworthOct 1 '14 at 16:07

1

Rhetorically speaking, it's only a flaw if someone applies the critical thinking necessary to determine that this is true. Otherwise, it may seem like a very reasonable thing to say and be quite persuasive to the audience. That's why logical fallacies aren't always obvious to observers.
– John FeminellaOct 1 '14 at 16:14

2

The definitions I can find say that procatalepsis is an attempt to respond pre-emptively to expected arguments. It doesn't have to be a valid or successful response, any more than it would be if the response were made after the objection.
– BarmarOct 1 '14 at 16:16

Carnegie suggests for the eighth point that you surface a flaw in your own proposal that is easy for the hearer to correct. When the hearer recognizes the easy solution, he begins to have some emotional connection to the idea. He begins to embrace your idea as his own idea, and then (in the ninth point) is happy to do what you suggest.

You could call it a "statement" and a "sentence" too. Each of these would be true, but don't really provide the meaning asked for in the question. "strategem" is not "a kind of strategy where you point out the fallacy before anyone else can". "strategem" is any kind of strategy....
– GreenAsJadeOct 2 '14 at 2:37

Please take a look at the definition of stratagem, listed in the answer. Stratagem is not any kind of strategy. Stratagem contains the sense of a trick or a ruse. Torpedoing your own proposal in order to promote it has the feel of a ruse.
– rajah9Oct 2 '14 at 13:07